Thanks!

Karolis
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Gert Vanthienen
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Karolis,
>
> The Camel 2.8.3 vote has been started today, so that will take a few more
> days (if it passes) before that will be available.  We should be able to
> follow up with the ServiceMix release builds a few days after the Camel
> release is out in the wild, so I'd expect a release vote somewhere next
> week.
>
> Regards,
>
> Gert Vanthienen
> ------------------------
> FuseSource
> Web: http://fusesource.com
> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Karolis Petrauskas
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>>    When do you expect to release ServiceMix 4.4?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Karolis
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Gert Vanthienen
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > L.S.,
>> >
>> >
>> > So it looks like both the CXF and Camel community can help us out with a
>> > quick fix release here, so let's make sure we're ready to follow up with
>> our
>> > ServiceMix 4.4.0 release batch as soon as those are done. We definitely
>> owe
>> > them an extra credit in the release announcement as well, imho ;)
>> >
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Gert Vanthienen
>> > ------------------------
>> > FuseSource
>> > Web: http://fusesource.com
>> > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Gert Vanthienen
>> > <[email protected]>wrote:
>> >
>> >> L.S.,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> OK, so it looks like we have two options here:
>> >> #1. Karaf 2.2.2, CXF 2.4.2, Camel 2.8.1 and Spring 3.0.5.RELEASE, all of
>> >> which is available right now so we can start the release process any
>> day now
>> >> #2. Karaf 2.2.4, CXF 2.4.4 and/or CXF 2.5.0 and a matching Camel
>> release -
>> >> this would mean we're waiting for a few more weeks again until the CXF
>> and
>> >> Camel release are done
>> >>
>> >> Based on Dan's last mail, I'll ping the camel dev list to see if they
>> have
>> >> some bandwidth to do a quick Camel 2.8.3 release after the CXF 2.4.4
>> release
>> >> is done - if there's a way to get things aligned in the next week or 2,
>> it's
>> >> probably well worth the wait.  Otherwise, I'd suggest we go with #1 and
>> plan
>> >> for a follow-up release once Camel 2.9.0 is out.
>> >>
>> >> In the meanwhile, let's try to work with the Karaf team to figure out a
>> >> solution for some of these dependency alignment issues we're facing
>> (e.g.
>> >> with the references to other features.xml files) to ensure we don't
>> have to
>> >> do this exercise every time again.  If we could get the features
>> >> cross-referencing issue resolved and make the features-maven-plugin a
>> bit
>> >> more version-aware, we should be able to get things out way quicker than
>> >> what we're doing now...  FYI - the thread for that discussion is at
>> >> http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/Features-td3423534.html
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >>
>> >> Gert Vanthienen
>> >> ------------------------
>> >> FuseSource
>> >> Web: http://fusesource.com
>> >> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Wednesday, October 26, 2011 12:11:32 PM Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>> >>> > L.S.,
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Unless someone sees a real issue in the inconvenience of having the
>> two
>> >>> CXF
>> >>> > features URLs in the assembly, I'm guessing we're going for Karaf
>> >>> 2.2.4/CXF
>> >>> > 2.4.4/Spring 3.0.6.RELEASE/... here for ServiceMix 4.4.  I'll start
>> >>> updating
>> >>> > the POMs again to bump versions.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > BTW, I also understand the Camel community is planning to do a Camel
>> >>> 2.9.0
>> >>> > release somewhere in the next few days -
>> >>>
>> >>> It's only a 2.9.0-RC1, not a full 2.9.0 release.   That's likely a
>> couple
>> >>> weeks away.    I'm actually hoping to get 2.9.0 on CXF 2.5.0 by then.
>> >>>
>> >>> Dan
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> > would it be worth waiting for that
>> >>> > one too (and perhaps we can ask them to consider upgrading to CXF
>> 2.4.4
>> >>> as
>> >>> > well, that the entire universe is back in line)?
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Regards,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Gert Vanthienen
>> >>> > ------------------------
>> >>> > FuseSource
>> >>> > Web: http://fusesource.com
>> >>> > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Gert Vanthienen <
>> >>> [email protected]
>> >>> > > wrote:
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > L.S.,
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Thanks for pointing that out!  It's good to know that the CXF
>> >>> community
>> >>> > > can facilitate those quick fix releases if necessary.  By all
>> means,
>> >>> if
>> >>> > > you or any of the other guys has some bandwidth to do the extra
>> >>> > > release, that would obviously be great.  I guess the 'quick fix'
>> that
>> >>> > > Freeman mentioned became the real solution then...
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > I just gave things a quick try here and just upgrading to CXF
>> >>> > > 2.4.4-SNAPSHOT does seem to work out fine for the most part.  There
>> >>> are
>> >>> > > some test failures in some of the itests, but those may well be
>> >>> > > something I missed in my attempt to quickly test this.  Other than
>> >>> > > that, the resulting kit does seem to work fine - it does have
>> multiple
>> >>> > > versions of the CXF features descriptor installed because the Camel
>> >>> > > descriptor still points at the old version (cfr. one of the issues
>> >>> that
>> >>> > > came up in the 'Features' thread earlier on).
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > As far as I am concerned, this is just a minor inconvenience
>> compared
>> >>> to
>> >>> > > the possible benefit of being able to upgrade to more recent fix
>> >>> > > versions of almost anything else, so if the offer to provide a CXF
>> >>> > > 2.4.4 fix release still stands, we'd highly appreciate that.
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > (my apologies for the annoyance - it was in no way intentional, in
>> >>> > > ServiceMix-land we always have to wait for the entire universe to
>> >>> align
>> >>> > > to do a release - fancy a Belgian beer or some chocolates some day
>> to
>> >>> > > make up for it ? ;)).
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Regards,
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Gert Vanthienen
>> >>> > > ------------------------
>> >>> > > FuseSource
>> >>> > > Web: http://fusesource.com
>> >>> > > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > >> I just want to point out that I find it slightly "annoying" that,
>> >>> > >> throughout
>> >>> > >> this discussion, not one person has even asked on the CXF lists
>> what
>> >>> > >> it
>> >>> > >> would
>> >>> > >> take to get a 2.4.4 release out that fixes the issue.   CXF is
>> likely
>> >>> > >> the community that would be MOST willing to get releases out to
>> fix
>> >>> > >> issues, it's
>> >>> > >> just a matter of asking.  It's been done for Geronimo.  It's been
>> >>> done
>> >>> > >> for JBoss.   etc....
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> I'm planning on doing the CXF 2.5.0 builds later this week or
>> early
>> >>> > >> next
>> >>> > >> week
>> >>> > >> (as discussed on dev@cxf earlier this month).   Doing the 2.4.4
>> >>> > >> release
>> >>> > >> at the
>> >>> > >> same time is not a big deal.  We could have done one sooner if
>> >>> someone
>> >>> > >> would
>> >>> > >> have asked.    For that matter, Freeman, Guillaume, Willem, etc..
>> >>> > >> could
>> >>> > >> have
>> >>> > >> easily started a CXF release.  Unlike smx releases, CXF releases
>> are
>> >>> > >> fairly
>> >>> > >> quick and easy.   Mostly painless.  :-)   And documented:
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> http://cxf.apache.org/release-management.html
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> Dan
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> On Monday, October 24, 2011 11:54:23 AM Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>> >>> > >> > Hey Freeman,
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > I missed the remark that we're stuck on the backlevel versions -
>> >>> > >> > I'll
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> make
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > the necessary corrections to get things on these versions again.
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > FWIW, I do think we have to figure out a way to improve features
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> descriptors
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > to avoid being stuck on entire set of backlevel artifacts just
>> >>> > >> > because
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> of
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > one issue in one of the dependencies.  There should be no
>> >>> > >> > technical
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> reason
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > why we can't upgrade to Spring 3.0.6.RELEASE because of an issue
>> >>> > >> > in CXF 2.4.2 in my mind - shouldn't OSGi version ranges allow us
>> >>> > >> > to just do>>
>> >>> > >> these
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > little upgrades without breaking everything else?
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > Regards,
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > Gert Vanthienen
>> >>> > >> > ------------------------
>> >>> > >> > FuseSource
>> >>> > >> > Web: http://fusesource.com
>> >>> > >> > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Freeman Fang
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> <[email protected]>wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > Hi JB,
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > CXF 2.4.3 has a problem that the http-osgi transport can't
>> >>> > >> > > work with
>> >>> > >> > > felix, also the cxf 2.4.3 use spring 3.0.6 which can't work
>> >>> > >> > > with karaf 2.2.2, also camel 2.8.1 use cxf 2.4.2, for the
>> >>> > >> > > reason above all, we should use CXF 2.4.2/Camel 2.8.1/Karaf
>> >>> > >> > > 2.2.2 for SMX 4.4.
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > Btw, I just revert for components trunk so that we still use
>> >>> > >> > > cxf
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> 2.4.2.
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > > Regards
>> >>> > >> > > Freeman
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > On 2011-10-17, at 下午5:24, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
>> >>> > >> > >  Hi all,
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > >> All required dependencies are now available to ServiceMix
>> >>> > >> > >> 4.4:
>> >>> > >> > >> - CXF 2.4.3 has been released and available on Maven central
>> >>> > >> > >> repo
>> >>> > >> > >> - Camel 2.8.1 has been released and available on Maven
>> >>> > >> > >> central repo
>> >>> > >> > >> - ActiveMQ 5.5.0 is available
>> >>> > >> > >> - Karaf 2.2.2 is available
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> I think that we are ready for the ServiceMix 4.4 release.
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> As discussed before, the releases will be performed in a
>> >>> > >> > >> row, it
>> >>> > >> > >> means:
>> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix Utils 1.5.0
>> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix Components 2011.02
>> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix NMR 1.5.0
>> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix (Features) 4.4.0
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> and in a second row:
>> >>> > >> > >> - ServiceMix 3.4
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> I guess that the following Jiras should be fixed before
>> >>> > >> > >> release:
>> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4-939
>> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4-916
>> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4-885
>> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4-884
>> >>> > >> > >> - SMX4NMR-269
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> I will pick up some. It could be great if we can cut off the
>> >>> > >> > >> releases at
>> >>> > >> > >> the end of this week.
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> WDYT ?
>> >>> > >> > >>
>> >>> > >> > >> Regards
>> >>> > >> > >> JB
>> >>> > >> > >> --
>> >>> > >> > >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> >>> > >> > >> [email protected]
>> >>> > >> > >> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> >>> > >> > >> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > ------------------------------**---------------
>> >>> > >> > > Freeman Fang
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > FuseSource
>> >>> > >> > > Email:[email protected]
>> >>> > >> > > Web: fusesource.com
>> >>> > >> > > Twitter: freemanfang
>> >>> > >> > > Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.**com
>> >>> > >> > > <http://freemanfang.blogspot.com>
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> --
>> >>> > >> Daniel Kulp
>> >>> > >> [email protected]
>> >>> > >> http://dankulp.com/blog
>> >>> > >> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>> >>> --
>> >>> Daniel Kulp
>> >>> [email protected]
>> >>> http://dankulp.com/blog
>> >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>

Reply via email to